So it's ok when you pay for the service? Are you suggesting that Apple doesn't collect information about your iTunes purchases, your iTunes Match library, etc?

For some reason - there are elements of this discussion which seem backwards. That people are more OK paying to have their data collected + a service they want vs getting the service for free and having their data collected.

Newsflash - you can opt of either, both or none. Apple is no more "altruistic" than Google is. No matter how you want to spin it

Where did I say anything about Apple? Why does every discussion here have to devolve into Google vs. Apple, like some kind of west coast-east coast rap war?

What I was taking exception to is the constant drone by tech bloggers of "free service". It's not free. I don't use Apple match because I prefer my privacy and I prefer lossless music. I'm not championing Apple on this issue, I'm asking for more honesty and scrutiny from bloggers in the tech products they write about. I know I shouted out MacRumors here, but every major tech blog glosses over the real price to customers -- Techcrunch, Verge, The Next Web, Engadget....

So, Apple struck a negotiated deal with all the labels so that they would be compensated for the music uploaded, much of which has been pirated by some.

Now, Google is doing the same thing, without charging anyone for it. How are the artists getting paid for the cloud versions? Is Google just footing the bill? Maybe. Probably. All under the guise of sucking you further into their world where they make money off of who you are, what you do, what you write, what you search for, and what you think.

I'll stick with Apple, paying my fee, so that I'm the customer and not the product.

Might want to check out the TOS you agree to with iTunes Match, Genius and Apple's other services.

So, Apple struck a negotiated deal with all the labels so that they would be compensated for the music uploaded, much of which has been pirated by some.

Now, Google is doing the same thing, without charging anyone for it. How are the artists getting paid for the cloud versions? Is Google just footing the bill? Maybe. Probably. All under the guise of sucking you further into their world where they make money off of who you are, what you do, what you write, what you search for, and what you think.

I'll stick with Apple, paying my fee, so that I'm the customer and not the product.

Although in all honesty, you probably use some google services anyway. So you're both the customer AND the product! hurrah!

and yes, they are probably footing the bill, in some way or other. Whether the money comes from a company's coffers (fattened by ad revenue in the case of google), or via a charge (i.e. iTunes Match)... its the same.

----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by petsounds

Where did I say anything about Apple? Why does every discussion here have to devolve into Google vs. Apple, like some kind of west coast-east coast rap war?

What I was taking exception to is the constant drone by tech bloggers of "free service". It's not free. I don't use Apple match because I prefer my privacy and I prefer lossless music. I'm not championing Apple on this issue, I'm asking for more honesty and scrutiny from bloggers in the tech products they write about. I know I shouted out MacRumors here, but every major tech blog glosses over the real price to customers -- Techcrunch, Verge, The Next Web, Engadget....

tech-bloggers have to earn a living too, you know? And it's Tech Companies what pays those advertising bills.

I think we lost our privacy when we created the Department of Homeland Security.....

No...we lost our privacy when we logged in....but we still do, and there's a trade-off...if the gov't cares what I listen to, or how many times my wife and I go to the adult store, that's fine...I don't break the law (although I push the bounds of a speed limit) and I have no plans to overthrow the government...let them listen...

We take our shoes off before we can board a plane, you can not walk a step anywhere without being on camera, the phone conversations are recorded and emails saved somewhere.... So if Google knows what products I'm interested in and presents them to me, I'm fine with that :-)

I actually find that more useful than the never ending emails from Apple telling me to buy products from them I already own.

£21.99 pa for iTunes Match and baked in cost for iOS and OS X in the cost of the hardware I willingly pay a premium for. You?

What about all your purchases on iTunes. Not match - iTunes.

So iOS is a baked in cost for Apple so it's not free. But Android is just free. The ability to rationalize is fantastic.

Anyone who thinks that Apple is any less interested in your anonymous data than Google is deluding themselves. The fact that Apple isn't nearly as successful at it doesn't mean they haven't been trying.

And as I said before - Google isn't the company you should be worrying about. Go read up on the company Axciom.

Thousands of pounds. I don't keep a running total. I like paying for things I use. Period.

Ok - so again - you're OK with paying for stuff which allows Apple to track you, your purchases and spending habits. But If Google offers a service for free - you're against it. GOT IT.

My original comment was thus "For some reason - there are elements of this discussion which seem backwards. That people are more OK paying to have their data collected + a service they want vs getting the service for free and having their data collected."

I am not google bashing. In fact, I use google all the time. Not particularly google drive, google play or their hardware (but I may do in future if I can categorically decide it is better than what anyone else is making).

I have a 5,000 song library. I tried google play just to test it out on my work PC. It uploaded max 50% of my songs and it looks a mess compared to iTunes. Half of the uploaded albums don't have artwork and generally doesn't look good. Besides, living in the UK (as we do), streaming doesn't work for me on mobile devices because 3G is patchy at best, particularly on the train network where I spend a lot of my dead time.

I am not google bashing. In fact, I use google all the time. Not particularly google drive, google play or their hardware (but I may do in future if I can categorically decide it is better than what anyone else is making).

I have a 5,000 song library. I tried google play just to test it out on my work PC. It uploaded max 50% of my songs and it looks a mess compared to iTunes. Half of the uploaded albums don't have artwork and generally doesn't look good. Besides, living in the UK (as we do), streaming doesn't work for me on mobile devices because 3G is patchy at best, particularly on the train network where I spend a lot of my dead time.

FYI - I was responding to "if you are not paying for it, you are the product!"

You're every bit a product to Apple as Google. Paying for it doesn't exclude you from that. It's just a different business model.

Ok - so again - you're OK with paying for stuff which allows Apple to track you, your purchases and spending habits. But If Google offers a service for free - you're against it. GOT IT.

I am not against Google. I don't care who tracks me. I am not important enough or interesting enough to care if someone wants to make money out of my online behaviour. Kudos to them for having the know-how to do it in a 'COMPLIANT' way. i.e. without breaking the law.

But playing music on my mobile devices is a significant reasons I own an iPhone - not as high up the list as UI but key nonetheless. And to date, I have not found a suitable alternative.

I am not against Google. I don't care who tracks me. I am not important enough or interesting enough to care if someone wants to make money out of my online behaviour. Kudos to them for having the know-how to do it in a 'COMPLIANT' way. i.e. without breaking the law.

But playing music on my mobile devices is a significant reasons I own an iPhone - not as high up the list as UI but key nonetheless. And to date, I have not found a suitable alternative.

Completely understand. Being in the USA - I don't have the same issues. Although as I wrote earlier - the Website UI and UX for Google Music needs work

FYI - I was responding to "if you are not paying for it, you are the product!"

ok, but the minute I decide to wipe my iPhone, Macs etc apple doesn't have an interest in me. Alas, google does. And it's the fear of the unknown that worries me. Apple doesn't have an unhealthy interest in what searches I do for instance. Nor what youtube clips I play. Nor what is on my calendar. Google does. What do they do with it? I don't know, so I tread with care. My choice. I am not advocating others follow it. But they probably should!

ok, but the minute I decide to wipe my iPhone, Macs etc apple doesn't have an interest in me. Alas, google does. And it's the fear of the unknown that worries me. Apple doesn't have an unhealthy interest in what searches I do for instance. Nor what youtube clips I play. Nor what is on my calendar. Google does. What do they do with it? I don't know, so I tread with care. My choice. I am not advocating others follow it.

Ok. To play devil's advocate - the minute you opt out and/or delete your google account(s) - it's the same result, no?

Ok. To play devil's advocate - the minute you opt out and/or delete your google account(s) - it's the same result, no?

possibly. I don't know. I look at instagram and FB (and I know google is not FB, merely bring them in the conversation as other examples of the same business model which relies on making money on your data) and wonder what happens to my data with google once I opt out.

Really Not sure what use iCloud would be, if you haven't purchased an Apple product, service, or media from one of their stores. They have made their money from purchased hardware, or purchased music, by the time iCloud can really become useful.

I don't really understand your point here. It's not like google play will give you the music for free? You need to have bought it from somewhere in the first place. iTunes, Amazon MP3 store or google play shop. So the apples to apples comparison must SURELY be iTunes match vs. google play service. £21.99 vs. FREE. To me £21.99 is a price worth paying.

I don't really understand your point here. It's not like google play will give you the music for free? You need to have bought it from somewhere in the first place. iTunes, Amazon MP3 store or google play shop. So the apples to apples comparison must SURELY be iTunes match vs. google play service. £21.99 vs. FREE. To me £21.99 is a price worth paying.

Do you think Apple isn't culling data from the music you are uploading and using it? For one thing - they have to report all the songs you've uploaded and matched because they have to pay the labels.

So my point is - you're paying for your data to be collected vs google's service which collects the same data - but is free. Paying for something doesn't exclude you from being a "product" vs a "customer"